Mugato:Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.

Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.

cman:FFS, folks, cant you assholes just make up your damned mind already?

If you want consistency, go to FiveThirtyEight. His latest blog post is about how the polls are basically back to where they were on June 7th after the convention and debate fluctuations. Media outlets breathlessly reporting every swing state poll as if they're directly related is vacillating nonsense.

Wanna see some epic teeth gnashing? Go into ANY Yahoo news story regarding Obama. ANY. The comments will be full of teabaggers in a massive circle-jerk of derp. If (or more likely, when) Obama wins this, the resulting pants-sh*tting epidemic could actually be a bit scary. People are saying things that would have resulted in a Secret Service visit 10 years ago...

The whole election is turning into a Bush-Kerry repeat, in that voters are willing to stick with a known incumbent over a poorly-differentiated challenger in spite of the opposition party's hyperbolic vitriol. So the numbers have remained remarkably stable, and are likely to stay that way as storm coverage eats up the news coverage almost until election day.

Yeah, fraud. I said it. Voter. Fraud. Stolen. Election. SCOTUS. Just keep it close enough to look legit.

Turdblossom isn't gone away. He's just working behind the scenes.

Well, that's part of why the GOP puppetmasters are trying so hard to pump out the claim that Romney is just oh-so-close in Ohio. Because if everyone knows Obama has it wrapped up going into the election, it'll make a greater number of people more likely to be suspicious. They already had a close call with the unprecedented exit polling disparity (against reported results) in the 2000 and 2004 elections.

The plight of the internet. We live in information age. The problem is the masses don't know how to interpret that information. We need to teach statistics and probability; at the least most still will have a grasp of the basic Gaussian distribution.

We would see less headlines like "statistical dead heat" as many will be able to call out the bullshiat stains of the mass media. Until then people will believe polls and "skew" them to whomever satisfies their political discourse.

Just stop it and grasp the basic elementary concept of statistics and probability.

Mugato:Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.

Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.

If a Democrat going against an incumbent Republican had made that gaffe at any point in the election, it would have been news for 36 hours at least.

SacriliciousBeerSwiller:Wanna see some epic teeth gnashing? Go into ANY Yahoo news story regarding Obama. ANY. The comments will be full of teabaggers in a massive circle-jerk of derp. If (or more likely, when) Obama wins this, the resulting pants-sh*tting epidemic could actually be a bit scary. People are saying things that would have resulted in a Secret Service visit 10 years ago...

Trust me, the Secret Service examines all threats, and is probably working over time this election season.

lemurs:The whole election is turning into a Bush-Kerry repeat, in that voters are willing to stick with a known incumbent over a poorly-differentiated challenger in spite of the opposition party's hyperbolic vitriol. So the numbers have remained remarkably stable, and are likely to stay that way as storm coverage eats up the news coverage almost until election day.

Hyperbolic vitriol? Um, did Obama start a war under false pretenses? Did he single-handedly take our foreign policy and flush it down the crapper?

SacriliciousBeerSwiller:Wanna see some epic teeth gnashing? Go into ANY Yahoo news story regarding Obama. ANY. The comments will be full of teabaggers in a massive circle-jerk of derp. If (or more likely, when) Obama wins this, the resulting pants-sh*tting epidemic could actually be a bit scary. People are saying things that would have resulted in a Secret Service visit 10 years ago...

In all fairness, there are the same types of people talking about assassinating Romney.

That being said, based upon the way things are going, I'll be happy on November 7th. I won't be overjoyed, because Obama is far from what I'd like to see, since he's a center-right authoritarian politician, but it's the better option over Romney since poor Jill doesn't have any sort of shot.

MFAWG:Mugato: Sybarite: Yes, I can clearly see how the many new and specific policy points illuminated in those debates could persuade 300,000 or so Ohioans to shift their preference from one candidate to the other.

Well Romney not being able to locate the country he plans to invade on a map might have swayed some people.

If a Democrat going against an incumbent Republican had made that gaffe at any point in the election, it would have been news for 36 hours at least.

Librul Media my ass

It's funny to see how the pendulum hasn't swung so much as fallen into a giant heap of metal and wire. No one trusts the media any longer. They only trust "their" media, be it bloggers, Fox News, or whatever.

coeyagi:lemurs: The whole election is turning into a Bush-Kerry repeat, in that voters are willing to stick with a known incumbent over a poorly-differentiated challenger in spite of the opposition party's hyperbolic vitriol. So the numbers have remained remarkably stable, and are likely to stay that way as storm coverage eats up the news coverage almost until election day.

Um, did Obama start a war under false pretenses? Did he single-handedly take our foreign policy and flush it down the crapper?